Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

From a number of forums that I go around, I've developed my own views for Famitsu and I would like to hear yours. I wish I can read Japanese so I can hear how 2chan boarders' view their most respected news magazine.

So what do you think? In these past years Famitsu have given some questionable review scores, especially when concerned with Square-enix published games.

Famitsu is known to be a magazine very influencable when it comes to notes. How to say that, it's depends at how much money the editor give to Famitsu...You don't read Famitsu for the notes but for the article.

However, it doesn't really influence what games I buy or play though. Their score system is good. There is nothing wrong with Famitsu's scores for Square-Enix games. Square-Enix games are quite good in most cases. Actually, Square-Enix used to be my favorite game company until more recently; its now second to Atlus.

So The Last Remnant(38) and Blue Dragon(37) vs Lost Odyssey(36) and ToV(35). DOA 4(39) vs SC4(35). Their pro evo compared to fifa scores are questionable too. It's a bullshit mag when it comes to scores. >_>

Though every gaming website became bullshit in my eyes after giving GTA IV 10's. <_<

Their scores are sometimes are incomprehensible (9 for Haze? What the...), but if you read their reviews most of the times they nail down the major pros and cons of a game (like in Last Remnant's case, or like in White Knight Chronicles' one). The score depends on how much they value both cons and pros. In Last Remnant's case all the technical glitches were considered pretty almost irrelevant and they rated it that high because of nice battle system it has. Which is also why they rated WKC not so high (which has a pretty much not-so-great battle system).

Famitsu and other magazines are only good for the lastest information and scans. Reviews are so-so, because it is alway subjective and the taste of the reviewer always determines the outcome/score. Apart from just looking at the numbers, the review itself, texts content, are interesting and important. Without reading the text the numbers don't mean anything. So i never got the point why websites just put up numbers without a summary from the reviewer.

Apart from what other people have brought up already, do note that Famitsu writes for the Japanese audience.

So the question becomes... how does your taste line up with the typical Japanese player? For the vast majority of western gamers, it won't line up at all, and thus looks like their scores are BS.

As an analogy, it would be like a typical Japanese player looking at a western magazine, seeing perfect scores for a game like say, Halo 3, and think that while it might be a great game, it's far from perfect.

Well Famitsu gave a 10/10/9/9 for both Call of Duty 4 and Fallout 3, which made perfect sense imo and I appreciate them for that. So yeah they do appreciate some of the western gems albeit mainstream. What I don't agree are their reviews when it comes for Squeenix stuffs especially the recently technically glitched Last Remnant.

Ever since they gave FFX 39/40 their reviews have been suspect to me. Giving FFXII 40/40 only sank their reputation even further. Seriously, did they actually PLAY that game? All the way through?

What's wrong with Final Fantasy X? Personally, I would give FFX a 40/40, while FFXII should get 38/40. The game had non-customizable controls setting which is opposite to that of most games, even those from Square-Enix itself.

I think the majority of people who have played Fallout 3 think it's not very good. I base this on scouring the Gametrailers forums.

You shouldn't really base your assumptions on the Gametrailers forums.

It's a good game, albeit like Kusa-san said, it's not really like the Fallout of before. If you enjoyed the previous Fallout games, you will probably have a few mixed reactions regarding on what has been changed (i.e., everything).

That said, I still think it's a good game, deserving of the praises by the gaming community. It's not the same Fallout I remember, but it's better than what I had initially expected to be a Fallout mod of Oblivion.

Personally, I have only played the original Xbox's Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel and I didn't find the game to be appealing at all. The only reason why I bought it was that the game only costed 3 bucks. The graphics aren't very good either.

Fallout 3 is ok, really. You can play it in 3rd person or 1st, by switching the camera. Apart from that it is actually a good transition from the old isometric 2D game. The V.A.T.S system kind of feels like the old system transfered into 3D.
The first two games were developed by Black Isle Studios and you should be get it in a boxset under a tenner, and it runs virtually under any PC, it was a DOS game afterall.